green analysis

8/7/2019 Green Analysis

1/42

Comparing Green Building Guidelinesand Healthy Homes Principles:A Preliminary Investigation

The Na tional Center for Healthy HousingApril 2006


2/42

Authors

Naomi Mermin, Senior Advisor to the National Center forHealthy Housing

Rebecca L. Morley, National Center for Healthy Housing

Kevin Powell, Building FYI Consulting

Ellen Tohn, Senior Advisor to the National Center forHealthy Housing

Acknowledgements

The National Center for Healthy Housing (NCHH) would liketo thank all of those who provided thoughtful comments onthis report including:

Dana Bourland, Enterprise Community PartnersDavid E. Jacobs, National Center for Healthy HousingMaureen M. Mahle, Steven Winter Associates, Inc.Tom Neltner, National Center for Healthy HousingGail Vittori, Center for M aximum Potential Building SystemsEric Werling, U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyJay Hall, Building Knowledge Incorporated


3/42

Table of Contents

Executive Summary..........................................................................................................................................................................3

Background .....................................................................................................................................................................................5

Summary of Programs Included in the Analysis ............... ................. ................. ................. ................. ................. ................. ....5

National Association of Home Builders Green Home Building Guidelines........................................................................5

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for Homes (LEED for Homes) ............... ................. ................. ...............6

Enterprise Community Partners Green Communities Criteria.............................................................................................7

American Lung Association Health House Builder Guidelines...........................................................................................7

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Energy Star with Indoor Air Package Pilot Specifications...................................8

Method of Analysis......................................................................................................................................................................8

Results .....................................................................................................................................................................................9

References ...................................................................................................................................................................................19

Appendix 1: International Code Council M odel Building Codes ..........................................................................................21

Appendix 2: List of Local Residential Green Building Programs..........................................................................................23

Appendix 3: Other Resources.......................................................................................................................................................29


4/42

..

abc


5/42

Executive Summary

Comparing Green Building Guidelines and Healthy Homes Principles: A Preliminary Investigation 3

Recently, there has been a proliferation of voluntary green

building programs aimed at improving commercial and

residential environments. The guidelines for these programs

primarily focus on product and material selection, maximiz-

ing energy-eff iciency, and reducing the impact of building on

the outdoor environment. However, proponents of greenbuilding programs are increasingly emphasizing the indoor

environmental aspects of their programs and their related

occupant health benefits. Ideally, a home should be

designed, constructed, and operated in a manner where all

building goals are optimized including environmental,

energy, durabilit y, aff ordabili ty, and occupant health

concerns.

In this preliminary report, the National Center for Healthy

Housing (NCHH) compared major national green building

and indoor air quality guidelines with its own set of recom-

mended healthy housing criteria t o assess the extent towhich these programs protect residents from health and

safety hazards. The analysis examined guidelines produced

by both the public and private sectors including: the U.S.

Green Building Councils LEED for Homes, the National

Associati on of Home Builders NAHB Green Home Building

Guidelines, and Enterprise Community Partners Green

Communities Criteria, spearheaded by Enterprise in partner-

ship w ith NRDC and other nati onal entit ies. NCHH also

included in the analysis the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agencys (EPA) Energy Star with Indoor Air Packageand the

American Lung Associations Health House Builder Guide-

lines, w hich are programs aimed primarily at improving the

quality of the indoor environment.

The analysis examines whether nati onal green guidelines

address housing conditions known to affect health status,

such as asthma and respiratory disease, unintentional

injuries, and toxic agents. We compared the crit eria in the

selected guidelines with NCHHs healthy housing principles,

whi ch were developed by a group of national experts under

a cooperative agreement from the Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention (CDC) for use in a nationwide train-ing and education program. In short, these Healthy Homes

principles provide for keeping homes dry, clean, well-

ventilated, pest-f ree, free from contaminants, safe, and

well-maintained.

The results showed that there is significant variation in the

degree to w hich national green guidelines consider occu-

pant health. For example, although most programs had

elements related to reducing moisture and improving venti-

lation, injury prevention was omitted from all of the guide-

lines and protection f rom contaminants such as lead and

pesticides were not uniformly covered. Only one program,Green Communities, focused on affordable existing housing,

an important consideration since low-income families

are disproportionately impacted by housing-related health

problems.

Overall, the analysis suggests that green building programs

offer a significant opportunity to achieve public health bene-

fits and have the potential to transform the housing market

toward healthier building. This report suggests ways to

strengthen the occupant health crit eria for green building

programs so that they may deliver greater benefits t o those

who are building and rehabilitating homes, and to the

families who reside in them.


6/42


7/42


Background

Most communities rely primarily on residential building

codes to protect occupants f rom housing-related health and

safety hazards. The International Code Council (ICC) publish-

es building codes, which are recognized by many states and

municipaliti es that regulate construction practices (see

Appendix 1). Properly enforced building codes provide abaseline f or building safety. According to t he ICC, the

purpose of buil ding codes is to establish the minimum

acceptable requirements necessary for protecting the public

health, safety and welfare in the built environment. 1

Traditionally, the minimum standard concentrated upon

structural, fi re, electrical, mechanical, and plumbing

concerns.

Expanding on these basic protections, dozens of jurisdic-

tions have created more comprehensive green and healthy

housing building crit eria (see Appendix 2 for a li st of green

building programs by region). For this analysis we chose tofocus on guidelines wit h a national f ocus. These guidelines

exist in many formats and are produced by several organiza-

tions with varying goals, such as energy conservation,

improved qualit y of lif e, and preventing adverse environ-

mental impacts.

We obtained green building guidelines or checklists from

the Nat ional Association of Homebuilders (NAHB), and the

United Stat es Green Building Council (USGBC) and Enter-

prise Community Partners. In addition, w e obtained the

indoor air quality guidelines from t he U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency and the American Lung Association. The

foll owing section provides a summary of t he guidelines

developed by these organizations.

Summary of Programs Included in

the Analysis

National Association of Home Builders

Green Home Building Guidel inesThe National Association of Home Builders (NAHB)

developed its Green Home Building Guidelines wi th main-

stream builders in mind. It is intended for people with

some expertise in environmentally conscious design and

construction and includes a criteria list with several

performance levels and associated verification measures.

The program emphasizes and rewards durable, well-built

homes. There is also a companion user guide to assist with

implementation. NAHB developed the guidelines through a

consensus-based process in 2004, with input from a variety

of stakeholder groups. The development process included

borrowing or actively involving administrators of the thentw enty-eight existing regional green building programs. The

guidelines seek to reduce the environmental impacts of

housing development by focusing on several key aspects of

the building process, w hich are termed guiding principles.

The stakeholder group determined the minimal requirements

for a house in each of these guiding principle groups, and

then developed additional features for each principle to dis-

tinguish a home as green. The stakeholder group identi-

fied point values for these additional features and devel-

oped bronze, silver, and gold designations for them (see

Figure 1). The point schedule assumes that a home is locat-

ed in the same Department of Energy designated climate as

Baltimore, Maryland. Unlike LEED for Homes (described

below), NAHBs program requires point totals in each cate-

gory (site, water, energy, etc) and it assigns Bronze, Silver,

or Gold performance levels in each category.________________________

1http://www.iccsafe.org/government/Toolkit/Briefing.pdf


8/42

Figure 1: Princ iples and Levels of Compliance

Leadership in Energy and EnvironmentalDesign for Homes (LEED for Homes)The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) administers the

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) pro-

gram. LEED for Homes is a voluntary initiative designed to

actively promote the transformation of the mainstream

home building industry toward more sustainable practices.

The LEED for Homes Programs long term goal is to recog-

nize and reward the top 25% of new homes, in terms of

environmental stewardship. LEED for Homes includes mar-

ket rate and affordable homes as well single family and

multi famil y homes. USGBC is targeting the innovators,

early adopters, and early majority segments of E.M.Rogers

taxonomy (Figure 2). The program is being piloted thru early2007. A public review of the LEED for Homes rating system

is planned for the second half of 2006.

Figure 2: Innovation Adoption by Group

USGBC has seven committees of national experts that have

oversight over LEED for Homes, including the LEED for

Homes Product Committees, five Technical Advisory Groups,

and a Technical Scientific Advisory Committee (TSAC). A

Builder Review Panel evaluated the pilot program and pro-

vided input to the pilot version of the Rating System that

rolled out in August 2005. A public review period also

occurred just prior to the release of the pilot. The pilot

demonstration phase is planned for eighteen months. The

product development cycle includes two public reviews, and

a membership ballot. The costs of participation in the LEED

for Homes Pilot are largely established by local or regional

Providers. The Provider is responsible for the thi rd party

inspection and performance testing services. These verifica-tion and rating services will take a total of approximately 2

to 3 days per home, although the costs will very with the

size and location of the homes, and the number of green

measures to be inspected and tested. USGBC charges each

builder a $150 fee to register in the Pilot, and an additional

$50 fee to certify each LEED Home. LEED for Homes has

seven primary criteria categories w ith associated point

totals adding up to a maximum of 108 (Table 1).

LEED for Homes has several performance tiers termed Certi-

fied (30-49 points), Silver (50-69 points), Gold (70-89 points),

and Platinum (90-108 points). The third-party Provider isresponsible for determining the LEED for Homes score and

the rating.


Bronze Silver Gold

Lot Design, Preparation, and Development 8 10 12

Resource Efficiency 44 60 77

Energy Efficiency 37 62 100Water Efficiency 6 13 19

Indoor Environmental Quallity 32 54 72

Operation, M ainenance, and Homeowner Education 7 7 9

Global Impact 3 5 6

Additional points from sections of your choice 100 100 100

EarlyAdopters

EarlyMajority

LateMajority

LaggardsInnovators

Rogers Adoption/Innvation Curve

2.5% 13.5% 34% 34% 16%

www.valuebasedmanagement.net


9/42

Enterprise Community Partners GreenCommunities CriteriaGreen Communities, a major initiative by Enterprise

Community Partners (Enterprise), is a five-year, $555 million

initiative to create more than 8,500 homes that deliver

signifi cant health, economic and environmental benefit s for

low -income famili es and communiti es. This groundbreaking

effort is a partnership between Enterprise, the Natural

Resources Defense Council , Global Green USA, the

American Insti tute of Architects, the American Planning

Associati on, the Nat ional Center f or Healthy Housing,

Southface, and leading corporate, f inancial and philan-thropic institutions. The foundational document for the

program was the Seattle SEAGreen.

Projects developed under the criteria must sati sfy all

mandatory elements, and gain additional points (twenty-

five points for new construction or twenty for rehabilitation

projects) from optional criteria. The criteria allow flexibility

if a particular hardship is demonstrated and an alternative is

proposed that meets the i ntent and accomplishes the same

outcome as the criteria. Building projects that conform to

the criteria are eligible for grants, loans, and tax credit

equity as incentives. This is currently the only green building

program that requires a certain percentage of new homes

or apartments to be dedicated to lower-income residents.

Some studies have demonstrated that mixed income neigh-

borhoods can demonstrate signifi cant health improvements,

compared to segregated, l ow-income communities.

The criteria are divided into categories in a simil ar fashion

as the other green building programs: Integrated Design Process Location and Neighborhood Fabric Site Improvements Water Conservation Energy Efficiency Materials Beneficial to the Environment Healthy Living Environment Operations and M aintenance

Optional criteria are available in Location and NeighborhoodFabric, Site Improvements, Energy Efficiency, Materials

Beneficial to the Environment, and Healthy Living Environ-

ment. Integrated Design Process, Water Conservation, and

Operations and M aintenance contain mandatory elements

exclusively. A review panel evaluates each project for grant

approval t hat includes a self-certif ication of compliances by

the grantees project architect and construction manager,

thereby eliminating the need for a third-party rating system.

American Lung Association Heal th HouseBuilder GuidelinesThe American Lung Association Health House Builder Guide-

lines are primaril y focused on the indoor environment and

occupant health (particularly respiratory health) and focus

on newly constructed homes. Both required and optional

elements are included. Optional elements are upgrades that

are recommended to enhance building performance. The


Table 1: Criteria Categories and Associated Point Values

Category Name Prerequisite (Y/N) and Type M ax. Point Total

Homeowner Awareness Y-Homeowner Manual 1

Location and Linkages 10

Energy & Atmosphere Y-ENERGY STAR Home 29Sustainable Sites N 14

Water Efficiency Y-water plan 12

Indoor Environmental Qual i ty Y-combust ion vent ing, humidi ty control , vent i lat ion

(manual D, whole house and spot), construction

cont aminat ion control, radon and car emission control 14

M at erials & Resources Y-durability plan, no t ropical hardw oods, w ast e

management 24

Innovation & Design Process N 4


10/42

Guidelines are organized by the follow ing building

categories: Site Building Envelope Finishes and Furnishings Mechanical Equipment

Commissioning Construction, Hygiene, Safety and Health

The basic tenets of the Health House guidelines are to

prevent moisture accumulation from soil, precipitation, and

condensation; limit or modify materials that off-gas pollu-

tants; ensure ventilation to all critical areas of a house;

promote the ease of home cleaning; and to educate the

homeowner about critical operation and maintenance

procedures.

U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyEnergy Star with Indoor Air Package PilotSpecificationsThe U.S. Environmental Protect ion Agency (EPA) developed

the Energy Star with Indoor Air Package (IAP) Pilot Specifi-

cations to recognize homes equipped with a comprehensive

set of indoor air qualit y measures. IAP is targeted to produc-

tion builders, which according to EPA, are the most rapidly

growing sector of the home building industry and is highly

influential in home building trends. Homes that comply with

these specifications can use Indoor Air Package as a com-

plementary label to Energy Star for homes. As a prerequisite

for this label, a home must first be Energy Star qualified.Energy Star is a performance-based program, which requires

qualified homes to be at least 30% more energy efficient

than homes built to t he 1993 national M odel Energy Code or

15% more efficient than state energy code, whichever is

more rigorous. These savings are based on heating, cooling,

and hot water energy use and are typically achieved through

a combination of building envelope upgrades, high perform-

ance windows, controlled air infiltration, upgraded heating

and air conditioning systems, tight duct systems, and

upgraded w ater-heating equipment. IAP requires a suite

of additional prescriptive measures, consisting of seven

primary components: Moisture Control Radon Control Pest Control HVAC Systems

Combustion Safety Building M aterials Home Commissioning

Like Energy Star, IAP requires third-party verification

through the Home Energy Rating System (HERS) to ensure

compliance.

M ethod of AnalysisWe developed a matrix to compare the criteria of the five

national programs with NCHHs recommended health and

safety criteria that enable a home to meet NCHHs seven

healthy homes principles: Keep It Dry Keep It Clean Keep It Well Ventilated Keep It Safe Keep It Free of Contaminants Keep It Pest Free Keep It Well Maintained

These principles were developed by a broad-based

expert workgroup of housing and health professionals

as part of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention funded National Healthy Homes Training

Center and Network. For more information see

www.healthyhousing.org/training. The principles reflect

the latest in scientifi c research and best practices related

to reducing housing-related health hazards.

In the left column of Table 2 is a list of NCHHs recommend-

ed criteria for achieving the above principles. This detail ed

matrix indicates the extent to which each of the five

programs includes simil ar or equivalent criteria t o that

recommended by NCHH. A program received a score of

three for a mandatory criterion t hat is equivalent t o NCHHs

recommended criterion. A program received a score of two

if the criterion was similar (e.g., partially addressed the

criterion) and was mandatory. A score of one was assigned

to a criterion that was either similar or equivalent, but

optional. A program received a zero for a criterion that was

omitt ed altogether. In some circumstances a not applicable(N/A) was assigned to a given criteria. For example, under

the Green Communit ies program, very few garages wi ll be

installed and therefore, the criteria related to air handling

equipment in garages was consider N/A.



11/42


Table 3 summarizes the degree to which these programs

meet the overarching healthy homes principles. Programs

that required all of NCHHs criteria (e.g., scored a two or

three for every criterion w ithin a category) received the

highest rating. A program that scored a two or three for 75

to 99 percent of the items within a category received the

middle rating. Programs that achieved a tw o or three forless than 75 percent of the criteria received the lowest

ranking. For instance, the Keep it Dryprinciple contains 12

criteria. To achieve the highest rat ing, a program would

have to score a 2 or 3 for all 12 criterion. The middle rank-

ing w ould be assigned if it scored a 2 or 3 for nine or more

of the 12 criteria (12 x 75%=9). The ALA Health House pro-

gram scored a two or three for all 12 criteria and therefore,

received the highest rating. The EPA Indoor Air Package

scored a three for ten out of the 12 criteria and therefore,

it received the middle ranking. Because none of the NAHB

Green Home Builder Guidelines were mandatory it scored a

one for all of t he Keep it Dry criteria and therefore, received

the lowest ranking.

This analysis does not assign a w eighting f actor to each

individual criterion, because this w ould involve making sub-

jective judgments about the value of an individual criterion,

which would require scientific data to support weighting

one item more heavily than another. From a public health

standpoint we view all of the healthy homes principles as

important to the health and safety of residents. In develop-

ing the recommended healthy homes criteria and the under-

lying healthy homes principles w e have attempted to ref lect

current knowledge and best practices and to incorporatecriteria that are feasible to implement (e.g. can be broadly

adopted) and wil l contribute to health improvements. There

is a need for additi onal research to identi fy how much each

factor contributes to the occupants overall health status.

The review did not consider the costs of the various building

standards because none of the standards provide cost esti-

mates. Only the Green Communities Criteria explicitly con-

siders costs. In addition, of t he guidelines, only the Green

Communit ies Criteria are directed toward both new

construction and rehabilitation activities. Of the guidelines

reviewed, the Green Communities Criteria has the broadest

application when viewed in this context.

ResultsTable 2 shows the results of the analysis.

LEEDforHome

s

NAHBGreenH

ome

BuildingGuidelines

Green

Communities

ALAHealthHouse

EnergyStarIn

door

AirPackage

RelevantCrite

ria

Table 2: Degree of Consistency w ith Healthy Homes Princ iples (1=least consistent; 3= most consistent).

Criteria

Keep It Dry

For conventional hot water heaters and equipment 1 0 3 3 3 LEED M R 4.1; NAHBthat condense wat er (e.g., air conditioner, dehumidif ier) Sec. 4.1.1, GCI 7-8,install drains or catch pans that capture overflow or leaks. ALA 191, EPA 4.9;

Do not install mold-susceptible materials such as vinyl 1 1 3 3 3 LEED M R 4.1; NAHB

wal lpaper, paper-faced gypsum board, and unsealed grout Sec 5.3.2; GCI 7-10;in wet areas. Use highly durable, moisture-resistant ALA 50, 183;material s in tub/ shower enclosures (cement board, EPA 1.20fiberglass-reinforced board).


12/42


Basements and Concrete Slabs: Provide proper drainage to 1 1 2 2 3 LEED M R 4.1; NAHBthe low est level of concrete. Waterproof exterior of below 2.2.3 and 2.2.11;grade foundati on wal ls. Provide continuous crushed stone GCI 7-11; ALA 24,under foot ings or provide pipe through foot ing for drainage 29-31, 46-49, 60,of any accumulated wat er under slab to drainage. Install a 61; EPA 1.16, 1.18;capillary break of 4 inches of clean or washed gravel (0.5-inch LEED 4.1; ALA 184;or greater), placed over soil. Cover w ith a 6-mil limet er (mil) EPA 6.3;polyethylene sheeting moisture barrier, with joints lappedone foot or more to prevent moisture from migrati ng fromthe soil through the slab to a living or storage area. Oninterior below-grade walls, avoid using separate vaporbarrier or a below- grade vertical insulation that can trapmoisture inside wall systems (e.g., polyethylene sheeting,vinyl wallpaper or foil faced). Raise paper covered gypsumboard 1/2 inch above concrete slabs.

Crawlspaces: Do not vent crawl spaces. Cover floor w ith 1 0 0 2 3 LEED M R 4.1; ALAcontinuous sealed vapor retarder sealed to wal ls and 32, 51-59; EPA 1.17insulate walls.

Insulate cold water pipes in climates and building 1 1 3 3 0 LEED EA7.1; NAHBconditions suscepti ble to moisture condensation. Avoid 5.3.5 & 5.3.6;putt ing plumbing in exterior wal ls. GCI 7-9; ALA 68;

Surface Water Drainage: Divert water drainage away from the 1 1 3 3 3 LEED M R 4.1; NAHB

building by directing gutters and downspouts to flow onto splash 2.2.5 & 2.2.6 & 2.2.9;blocks or a proper drainage system. Slope new and rebuilt walk- GCI 7-12; ALA 9, 21,ways, stairs, patios and thresholds away from the buildings. Best 103-106, 109; EPApractices include a grade of 0.5 inch per foot, or approximately 1.15, 1.14, 1.19, 1.20;a 4 percent pitch. EPA recommends a 2 percent pitch (0.25 inchper foot) for hard surfaces such as patio slabs, walks and drive-ways. Provide drain tile at footings, level or sloped to dischargeto out side grade (daylight) or to accessible sump pump. Top ofdrain tile pipe must alw ays be below the level of where bottomof concrete slab or crawl space floor wi ll occur. Pipe shall besurrounded with minimum of 6 inches of 3/4 inch washed orclean gravel that is fully wrapped with fabric cloth. Use a sealedsump pump system. Drainage system not required in pure sand.

Minimize and properly flash all roof penetrations and 1 1 2 3 3 LEED M R 4.1; NAHBconstruct effective eaves. Where feasible, extend eaves 2.2.1 & 2.2.12 &(ideally 18 inches to 2 feet, climat e conditions permit ting) to 2.2.2; GCI 7.12.(how);keep wat er away from the building. Provide step flashing at ALA 95-102; EPAintersections of roof and wall s wi th the exception of 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5;continuous flashing at metal and rubber membrane roofs.Use metal kick-out flashing at the end of roof/wallintersections to direct water away from wall.

LEE

DforHomes

NA

HBGreenHome

BuildingGuidelines

Green

Communities

AL

AHealthHouse

EnergyStarIndoor

AirPackage

RelevantCriteria

Criteria

Table 2 (cont.): Degree of Consistency w ith Healthy Homes Princ iples (1=least consistent; 3= most consistent).


13/42


LEE

DforHomes

NA

HBGreenHome

BuildingGuidelines

Green

Communities

AL

AHealthHouse

EnergyStarIndoor

Air

Package

RelevantCriteria

Criteria

Install continuous drainage plane fully sealed at all 1 1 2 2 3 LEED M R 4.1; NAHB:penetrati ons that directs wat er away from wal l assemblies. 2.2.9; GCI 7-12;

ALA 63, 69, 69; EPAIAQ: 1.7, 1.13

Install effective flashing on all rough openings, including 1 1 3 3 3 LEED MR 4.1;membrane flashing on bottom of all rough openings for NAHB 2.2.12;w indows (pan flashing) and doors, using adhesives compatible ASTM 21.12; GCIwith drainage plane materials and window and door head casing 7-12; ALA 74-77;fl ashing. Ensure proper instal lat ion of wi ndows and doors to EPA 1.8;protect moisture-sensitive materials f rom rainwater intrusion.

Reduce moisture problems caused by unnecessary heat loss 1 1 1 3 3 LEED EA 2.1;into and out of the unconditioned space. No non-airti ght NAHB 3.3.1; ALArecessed light fixtures in insulated ceilings. 242; EPA 1.10,

1.11; GCI 5.1

Plan landscaping so that mature plantings will be at least 24 1 1 0 3 0 LEED MR 4.1;from house. Avoid planti ng trees where root systems can ALA 10, 13penetrate the foundation and plumbing.

Avoid wall-to-wall carpet in wet areas including bathrooms, 1 0 3 3 3 LEED M R 4.1; GCIkitchens, utility rooms, basements, or entryways. 7-4; ALA 134;

EPA 6.10;

KEEP IT CLEAN

Install permanent walk-off mats, provide track off system, or 1 0 0 3 0 LEED IEQ 8.2;design to accommodate track off mats. Provide suffi cient ALA 79-82storage area for shoes and boots to encourage removal whenentering building.

Do not install carpet in at least one bedroom. If feasible, 1 0 1 3 0 LEED MR 5.2;instal l smooth and resili ent flooring in all rooms. GCI 7-17A, ALA,

83, 121, 145-155

If possible, install central vacuum system with exhaust to 2 0 1 3 3 LEED IEQ 8.2;the outdoors. GCI 7-17B; ALA

143; EPA 4.21

Table 2 (cont.): Degree of Consistency wi th Healthy Homes Princ iples (1=least consistent; 3= most consistent).


14/42


LEED

forHomes

NAH

BGreenHome

BuildingGuidelines

Gree

n

Com

munities

ALA

HealthHouse

Ener

gyStarIndoor

AirP

ackage

Rele

vantCriteria

Criteria

KEEP IT W ELL VENTILATED

Except for exhaust fans ducted to multiple bathrooms, install 3 1 2 3 3 LEED IEQ 5.1,Energy Star-labeled local exhaust bathroom fans per 5.2; NAHB 3.3.2;ASHRAE 62.2 that exhaust to the outdoors, are equipped wi th GCI 7-5; ALAa humidistat sensor or timer, and have rates of at least 208-209, 237;20 cfm continuous (50 cfm intermittent). For kitchens w ith gas EPA 4.16cook tops and/or gas ovens, install power-vented Energy-

Star labeled fans or range hoods per ASHRAE 62.2 thatexhaust to the exterior and have rates of 5 air changes perhour or 100 cfm intermit tent.

Adequately ventilate all living areas by follow ing ASHRAE 3 1 3 3 3 LEED IEQ4.1;62.2 or as a rough rule of thumb providing 15 cubic feet per GCI 7-6; ALA 206;minute of fresh air, per occupant, either via the HVAC system EPA 4.15or through natural ventilation.

Size HVAC systems to prevent short-cycling of heating or air 3 1 3 3 3 LEED EA 6.2; NAHBconditioning and ensure adequate dehumidif icati on (ACCA 3.1.2; GCI 7-7; ALAManual J and S). 240; EPA 4.8

Do not install air handlers or duct work in garage. Exhaust 3 0 N/A 3 3 LEED IEQ 10.1;ducts allowed if leakage is limited to


15/42


LEED

forHomes

NAH

BGreenHome

BuildingGuidelines

Gree

n

Communities

ALA

HealthHouse

Ener

gyStarIndoor

AirP

ackage

Rele

vantCriteria

Criteria

KEEP IT SAFE

Set water heater temperature at 120 degrees Fahrenheit. 0 0 0 0 0

Install medicine storage cabinets with locks in homes that may 0 0 0 0 0be occupied by young children.

Install grab bars inside and outside showers in housing units 0 0 0 0 0that may be occupied by persons over 55.

Provide smoke detectors per code AND hardwired with battery 2 2 2 2 2 Codes typicallybackup. require smokedetectors hence all

standards are scoredas having achieved

similar criteria;hardwired devices

wi th battery backupnot t ypically required.

Install one carbon monoxide (CO) alarm outside of each separate 3 1 2 3 3 LEED IEQ 2.1; GCIsleeping area in homes wi th combustion appliances. Install 7-13; ALA 199 (mustadditi onal alarm on interior wal l of attached garage. meet Canadian

std 6.19); EPA 5.6

KEEP IT FREE OF CONTAM IN ANTS

Use low-volatile organic compounds (VOC) paints and primers. 1 1 3 3 0 LEED MR 5.2;Use low -VOC sealants and adhesives. If carpet used, use tack NAHB 7.1.2; GCIstrips to lay down carpets whenever possible. 7-1; ALA 157;

NAHB 7.1.3;GCI 7-2; ALA 43,

154, 179

Ensure any composite wood used, (including interior panel 1 0 3 3 3 LEED MR 5.2;products, exposed particl eboard, M DF) is free of added urea NAHB 5.1.5; GCIformaldehyde, or sealed wi th a low -VOC, wat er-based sealant or 7-3; ALA 170-176;laminate. Wi re shelves are appropriate as an alternative. EPA 6.7 (ANSI

208.1 AND 208.2)

Carpet: If using carpet, install Carpet and Rug Institutes Green 1 1 2 3 3 LEED MR 5.2;Label Plus certif ied carpet. NAHB 5.1.6;

GCI 7-4; ALA 5.2;EPA 6.9



16/42


Use lead safe work practices when sanding, cutting, scraping, N/A N/ A 3 N/A N/A GCI 7-16drilling or i n any other way disturbing painted surfaces inhomes built before 1978, unless lead testing documents showthat the paint is not lead based. Follow Lead-Safe WorkPractices. Follow 24 CFR 35 for federally owned or assistedproperties. Follow the Lead Paint Field Safety Guide for allother properties.

Install detached garage OR tightly seal shared walls between 2 1 2 3 3 LEED IEQ 10.2,garage and conditioned spaces wi th: continuous air barrier, 10.3; NAHB 5.1.4;tightly sealed door from livi ng space to garage, air sealing of GCI 7-13;

all penetrati ons, walls, ceili ngs and floors, and minimum 100 ALA 110-118;CFM exhaust fan rated for continuous exhaust wi th automati c EPA 5.3-5.5;timer control to run f or a pre-set period of t ime w hen garagedoor opens and closes.

Use smooth and cleanable environmentally friendly flooring 1 1 1 3 3 LEED MR 5.2;products such as: linoleum, laminate, ceramic ti le, bamboo, NAHB 2.4.1 & 2.6.1cork, wood (especially salvaged wood), rubber or other low (use materialsVOC emitting products. from renewable

resources); GCI 7-10,7-17A; EPA 5.1;

Ensure all combustion fueled equipment in conditioned 3 1 2 3 3 LEED IEQ 2.1; NAHBspaces is vented to the outside and either sealed-combustion, 5.1.1 (water

direct vent, power-vented, induced draft , or aerodynamically heaters only); GCIde-coupled from the indoor air. No unvented fi replaces OR all 7-8 (water heatersfireplaces and solid fuel heating must have tight-fitting doors only); ALA 198; Eand dedicated utside combustion air. Non-closed combustion PA 5.1; LEED forsystems must be aerodynamically de-coupled from the Homes 2.1, 22; GCIindoor air. 7-8 (water heaters

only); ALA 198;EPA 5.2

If home is located in EPA Region 1, or local data suggest that 2 1 2 2 3 LEED IEQ 9.1, 9.2;there is a radon risk, design and instal l radon mit igati on GCI 7-11; EPA 2.1-system, and perform short term radon test. Radon test all 2.3, 7.6; NAHB 5.2.5homes after completion and before occupancy. Radonmitigation systems are strongly recommended for EPAregion 2.

LEED

forHomes

NAH

BGreenHome

BuildingGuidelines

Gree

n

Com

munities

ALA

HealthHouse

Ener

gyStarIndoor

AirP

ackage

Rele

vantCriteria

Criteria



17/42


LEED

forHomes

NAH

BGreenHome

BuildingGuidelines

Gree

n

Com

munities

ALA

HealthHouse

EnergyStarIndoor

AirP

ackage

Rele

vantCriteria

Criteria

KEEP IT PEST FREE

Seal all wall, floor and joint penetrations with rodent proof 1 1 3 3 2 LEED SS 5; NAHBmaterial s and low VOC caulk if appropriate. Apply boric acid 3.3.1 (w/ o rodent-in holes and cracks likely to experience pest problems. proof and boric acid

provisions); GCI 7-15;ALA 37-39, 107;

EPA 3.1

KEEP IT W ELL M AIN TAIN ED

Provide a Users M anual for the house, including written 3 3 3 3 3 LEED HA 1; NAHBoperation instruct ions for the house, maintenance schedule, 6.1; GCI 8-1, 8-2;maintenance instruct ions, equipment lit erature, equipment ALA various; EPAwarranties. 7.8

The builder shall provide the home buyer with a Homeowners 3 2 2 3 2 LEED HA 1;Manual / binder that includes: NAHB 6.1 & 6.2 ; Healthy Home/ Indoor Environment Certificate; and GCI 8-1,8-2), The completed checklist of Healthy Homes features; and 8-3; ALA 252; The product manufacturers manuals for all instal led EPA 7.7

equipment, fixtures, and appliances. A w alkthrough of t he home before closing, that i s at least

60 minutes in duration. The walkthrough should include: Identif ication of all installed equipment, and How to use measures and operate the equipment in their

Healthy Home appropriately; and How to maintain the measures and equipment in their

Healthy Home properly.



18/42


Table 3. Comparison of National Green Building Program Guidelines w ith Key Healthy Housing Princ iples

KEEP IT DRY*

KEEP IT CLEAN

KEEP IT WELL VENTILATED

KEEP IT SAFE

KEEP IT FREE OF CONTAM IN ANTS

KEEP IT PEST FREE

KEEP IT W ELL M AIN TAIN ED

* Received credit for detailed climate-based durability plan.

all criteria required 75% of criteria required less than 75% of criteria required

LEED

forHomes

NAHBGreenHome

Build

ingGuidelines

Green

Comm

unities

ALA

HealthHouse

EnergyStarIndoor

AirP

ackage

DiscussionThere is substantial variati on in the occupant health criteria

of t he national programs. Because of their specifi c focus on

occupant heal th, the ALA Health House and EPAs Energy

Star Indoor Air Package generally scored better. LEED for

Homes includes a 10 point credit for completing the ENER-

GY STAR with IAP certification. The green programs were

more variable in their consistency with NCHHs criteria. For

example, NAHBs guidelines are flexible in nature enablinga wider variety of practices to attain air quality goals.

Although this offers builders the ability to exceed the basic

requirements, it also provides the opportunity for builders to

under-perform on indoor air quality measures. The NAHB

standards received the low est rating because the criteria

are optional and it is difficult to ascertain whether they

would be followed.

All of the standards and guidelines specify low or no

volatile organic compound (VOC) emitting materials as a

mandatory or optional requirement. Traditional sources of

formaldehyde, panels with urea formaldehyde resins such

as particleboard or plywood, are either discouraged orrequired to be sealed with a low VOC sealer. From an occu-

pant health standpoint, wood is a healthy building materi-

al, generally creating a cleanable surface wi thout contribu-

tion of contaminants to the home. Woods visual warmth

Healthy and Affordable Building Principles


19/42


20/42


need for further scientif ic research and evaluation of the

health benefit s for residents l iving in green housing. Track-

ing and measuring the expected health improvements

among all of t he green programs is w orthy of consideration.

Furthermore, there is a need to standardize the health and

safety hazard assessment and treatment protocols currently

in use across the country. Finally, additional research andevaluation are needed to understand both t he impact of

green building programs on public health during the use

phase, and also the l ifecycle impacts on public health. A

cradle t o grave approach to building acknowledges both the

impacts for current residents, as well as considerations for

future families and communities.

NCHH applauds the national and local organizations that

have developed green building programs to help conserve

our nations energy and natural resources, protect the envi-

ronment, i ncrease our access to nature, and protect f amilies

from environmental health threats. These programs offer

new opportuniti es to create more livable and sustainable

communities and underscore the relevance of the built envi-ronment to our health and well-being. NCHH hopes this

review will promote the proliferation of these programs and

will spur a greater commitment to resident health as these

programs evolve and new programs emerge.


21/42


1. American Lung Association, Health House Builder

Guidelines, 2004.

2. American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-

Conditioning Engineers, Inc., ASHRAE Standard

Ventilat ion and Acceptable Indoor Air Quality inLow-Rise Residential Buildings, 2002.

3. Building for Social Responsibilit y/Vermont Energy

Investment Corporation, Vermont Builds Greener

Program v. 3.5, 2005.

4. Environmental Building News, Vermonts Built Green

Pushes the Envelope, Vol. 12 (7), 2003.

5. The Evergreen Foundation, Green Communities

Criteria,2005.

6. International Code Council,

http:// ww w.iccsafe.org/ government /Toolkit/ Briefing.pdf

7. National Association of Home Builders, NAHB Green

Home Building Guidelines, 2004.

8. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Energy

Star w ith Indoor Air Package Pilot Specifi cations,2005.

9. U.S. Green Building Council, TSAC PVC Task Group:

Assessment of Technical Basis for a PVC-Related

Materials Credit in LEED, 2004.

10. U.S. Green Building Council, LEED for Homes v. 1.23,

2005.

11. ww w.valuebasedmanagement.net/ methods_rogers_

innovation_adoption_curve.html

References


22/42

abc


23/42


Appendix 1

International Code Council M odel Building Codes International Building Code International Residential Code International Fire Code International Plumbing Code

International Mechanical Code International Fuel Gas Code International Energy Conservation Code International Private Sewage Code ICC Performance Code ICC Electrical Code Administrative Provisions International Property M aintenance Code International Zoning Code International Existing Building Code International Urban-Wil dland Code


24/42


Jur isd ic t ion IBC IRC IFC IMC IPC IPSDC IFGC IECC IPMC IEBC ICCPC IUWIC IZC ICCECAlaska X L X X L LAlabama L L L X L L L L L L L L L

Arkansas X X X X X03 X03

Arizona X L L L L L X L L

California

Colorado L L L L L L L L L L L L L

Connect icut X03 X X X03

Delaware L L L X L L L

Florida X X X

Georgia X X X X X X X

Hawaii

Iowa L L L L L L L L L L L L

Idaho X X X X X

Illinois L L L L L L L A00,L L L L L

Indiana X X X X X

Kansas X L L L L L L X L L

Kent ucky X X X L

Louisiana X L X L LMassachuset t s A A A

Maryland X X L L L L L L

Maine X03 X03 L L L L L L L L L

Michigan X X X X X X X X

Minnesot a X X X

Missouri L L L X X L L L L L L L

Mississippi L L L L L L L L L L L L

Mont ana X X X X X

Nort h Carolina X X X X X X X

Nort h Dakot a X X L X X L

Nebraska L L L L L L L L L L L L

New Hampshire X L L X X L X L

New Jersey X X X X

New Mexico X03 X03 L L L L X03 L X03

Nevada L L L L L L L

New York X X X X X X X X

Ohio X L L X X X L

Oklahoma X X X X X L X L X X L L

Oregon X X X X

Pennsylvania X X X X X X X L X X X X

Rhode Island X03 X03 X0 3 X03 X03 X0 3

Sout h Carolina X0 3 X0 3 X03 X03 X03 L0 3 X0 3 X0 3 L0 3 L0 3

Sout h Dakot a X L X L L L L L

Tennessee L L L L X L L L L

Texas L X L X X L L X L L L L

Ut ah X03 X03 X03 X03 X03 X0 3 X0 3

Virginia X X X X X X X X L X

Vermont X

Washingt on X X X X L L L

Wisconsin X L X X X

West Virginia X X X X X X X X

Wyoming X L X X L X L L

Dist rict of Columbia X X X X X X X X

Depart ment of Defense X

Nat ional Park Service XPuert o Rico X

U.S. Virgin Islands L03 L0 3 L0 3 L0 3

X = Eff ective Statewide A = Adopted, but may not yet be effect ive L = Adopted by Local Government s S = Suppleme03 = 2003 Edition 00 = 2000 Edition

International Codes-Adoption by Jurisdiction

ICC makes every effort to provide current, accurate code adoption information, but in some cases jurisdictions do not notify ICC of adoptions,

amendments or changes to their codes. To ensure you have accurate information, please contact the jurisdiction.


25/42

Appendix 2



26/42

ListofLocalResidentialGreenBuildingProgra

ms

NameofProgram

Location

Year

Type

Co

ntact

Phone

E-mail

Website

Begun

EarthAdvantage

Pacific

Northwest

1999

Private

Ra

ndyHansell

(503)603-1649

randy_

[email protected]

http://www.earthadvantage.com/

GreenBuilding

Scottsdale,

AZ

1998

Municipal

An

thonyFloyd,

(480)312-4202

[email protected]

http://www.scottsda

leaz.gov/greenbuilding

Program

AIA,

CBO

I-Built

Arizona

2003

HBA

JeanRichmond-

(928)779-3071

jean@

nazba.org

Bo

wman

SouthernGreen

Tucson

,AZ

TBA

TBA

LorettaIshida

(520)624-6628

Loretta

@dcat.net

BuildingAlliance

CaliforniaGreen

California

2001

HBA

Do

nMull

(866)340-8912

dmull@

cbia.org

http://www.cagreen

builder.org/Builder

GreenBuilding

AlamedaCounty,

Municipal

www.s

topwaste.org

Program

CAWa

ste

Manag

ement

Author

ity

InnovativeBuilding

SantaBarbara

1995

Municipal

Ka

thyPfeifer

(805)568-2507

kathyp

[email protected].

http://www.s

ilcom.c

om/~sbcplan/

ReviewProgram

County

,CA

ca.us

ibdrc.h

tml

Sustainable

Cityof

Berkeley,

http://www.c

ityofbe

rkeley.info/

Development

CA

sustainable/

Initiative

GreenStarBuilding

Cityof

Chula

2000

Municipal

www.c

i.chula-vista.ca.us

EfficiencyProgram

Vista,CA

InnovativeBuilding

County

ofSanta

1995

www.s

ilcom.com/~s

bcplan

ReviewProgram

Barbara,

CA

GreenBuilding

Cityof

Santa

1999

Municipal

www.greenbuildings

.santa-monica.or

Program

Monica,

CA


27/42

NameofProgram

Location

Year

Type

Contact

Phone

E-mail

Website

Begun

BuiltGreenColorado

Denve

r

1995

HBA

KimCalomino

(303)778-1400x212

kcalom

[email protected]

http://www.builtgre

en.org/

CityofAspenEfficient

Aspen

,CO

2003

Municipal

DenisMurray

970-920-5488

[email protected]

www.aspenpitkin.com/depts/41/

BuildingProgram

bldg_

efficient.cfm

GreenPointsProgram

Boulder,CO

1997

Municipal

ElizabethVasatka

(303)441-1964

[email protected]

http://www.c

i.boulder.co.us/

environmentalaffair

s/green_

points/

index.htm

FloridaGreen

Florida

2001

non-profit

RoyBonnell-

(239)263-6819

ExecD

ir@FloridaGreen

http://www.F

loridaGreenBuilding.org

BuildingCoalition,

Inc

Ex

ecutiveDirector

Building.org

EarthCraftHouse

Atlanta,

GA

1999

HBA(w/

DianneButler

(404)872-3549

[email protected]

http://www.earthcrafthouse.org

nonprofitad-

x118

ministration)

HawaiiBuiltGreen

Hawaii

TBA

HBA

NalaniE.

Blane

(808)847-4666

rtc@b

ia-hawaii.com

http://www.b

ia-haw

aii.com/subpage.

ext.

210

asp?section=70

Maryland

State

ofMaryland

1998

www.dnr.state.m

d.us/ed

EnvironmentalDesign

Dept.

ofNatural

Program

Resou

rcesMaryland

GreenBuilt,Inc.

(Greater)Grand

2001

non-profit

AnnDykema

(616)281-2021

adyke

[email protected]

http://www.h

baggr.com

Rapids,

Michigan

GreenBuiltGrand

Grand

Traverse

2004

HBA

DouglasLape

(231)946-2305

mailb

[email protected]

http://www.h

bagta.com/green.h

tml

Traverse

Area,

MI

BuildGreenProgram

Kansa

sCity,MO

2002

HBA

SarahWolak

(816)942-8800x226

[email protected]

http://www.buildgreenkc.com

ofKansasCity

NJGreenAffordable

NewJersey

1998

Municipal

DarrenPort

(609)292-3931

[email protected]

tate.n

j.us

www.n

j.gov/dca/dh

cr/hsg_

prog/

GreenProgram

njgreenhomes.s

htm

GreenGuidelines

BatteryParkCity,NY

2000

www.batteryparkcity.org/publications.h

tm


28/42


29/42


30/42

abc


31/42

Comparing Green Building Guidelines and Healthy Homes: A Preliminary Investigation 29

Appendix 3


32/42

OtherResources

Source:CoalitionofGreenBuildin

gPrograms(CGBP)

NationalProgramsand

Organizations

U.S.

DepartmentofEnergy(DOE)

EnergyStar

www.energy.gov

DOEEnergyCodes

BuildingCodes

www.energycodes.gov

DOE/WindowsandGlazingProgram

EfficientWind

owsCollaborative(EWC)(1997)

www.e

fficientwindows.org

DOE/BuildingTechnologiesProgram(BT)

ZeroEnergyHome(ZEH)(2002)/ZeroNetEnergy(ZNE)

http://www.eere.energy.gov/

DOE&EPA

BuildingAmericaProgram(1995)

www.buildingamerica.gov

InternationalCodeCouncil(ICC)

InternationalR

esidentialCode/InternationalEnergy

www.iccsafe.org

ConservationC

ode(IRC/IECC)

EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)

EPAEnergyStarLabelprogram(1992)EnergyStarWindows/

www.energystar.gov

Doors/Skylights(1998)

EPAEnergyStar

QualifiedNewHome(1994)

www.energystar.gov/homes

EnergyStarwithIndoorAirPackage(TBA)

http://www.epa.gov/

Energy&EnvironmentalBuildin

gAssociation(EEBA)

HousesThatW

ork/BuildingAmerica

www.eeba.org

EnterpriseCommunityPartners/NaturalResources

GreenCommunities

www.enterprisecommunity.org

DefenseCouncil

http://www.nrdc.org/

MascoContractorServices

EnvironmentsforLiving

Program-DiamondClass

www.e

flhome.com

NationalAssociationofHomeb

uilders(NAHB)

ModelGreenHomeBuildingGuidelines

www.nahb.org/gbg

SustainableBuildingsIndustryCouncil(SBIC)

www.S

BICouncil.org

TheGreenBuildingInitiative(G

BI)

PromotesNAH

BGreenGuidelines

www.t

hegbi.com

TheAllianceforHealthyHomes

Community-ba

sedcapacitybuildingandpolicychangetopromote.

www.a

fhh.org

healthyhousin

g


33/42


34/42

RegionalNon-profitOr

ganizationsandPrograms

AdvancedEnergy

www.a

dvancedenergy.org

AmericanLungAssociationSt.

Paul,MN

HealthHouse

(1993)-St.PaulMN

www.healthhouse.orgGreaterAtlantaHBA/Southface

EnergyInstitute(GA)

EarthCraftHo

use(1999)

www.earthcrafthouse.com

WisconsinEnvironmentalInitia

tive

GreenBuiltHome

(1999)

www.greenbuilthome.org

EnergyCenterofWisconsinMilwaukee,

WI

WisconsinGreenBuildingAlliances(WGBA)

www.wgba.org

FloridaGreenBuildingCoalitionInc.

(FGBC)

GreenHomeD

estination(2001)

www.f

loridagreenbuilding.org

FloridaSolarE

nergyCenter

www.fsec.ucf.edu

NorthCarolinaSolarCenter/StateEnergyOffice,

NorthCarolina

HealthyBuiltHomesProgram(2004)

http://healthybuilthomes.org/news.cfm

NCDept.ofAdmin.

ClevelandEnvironmentalCente

r

GreaterClevelandGreenBuildingCoalition(1999)

www.c

levelandgbc.org

Seattle,

WA

NWEBC-North

westEcoBuildingGuild(1993)

www.ecobuilding.org

SantaBarbara,

CA

GreenBuildingAlliance

www.g

balliance.com/intro.h

tm

VermontEnergyInvestmentCorp.

VermontBuild

sGreenerProgram(2003)

www.vermontbuildsgreener.org

MassachusettsTechnologyCol

laborative

GreenHomes

NorthEast(GHNE)

www.greenhomesnortheast.org

CentralNewMexico

BuildingAmer

icaPartnerProgram(2001)/EEBA(2003)

www.bapartner.org

StateofAlaskaOff.ofEnergyPrograms/Univ.ofAlaska

AlaskaCraftsmanHomeProgram,

Inc.

(ACHP)(1987)

www.a

laska.net/~achp

CooperativeExtensionservice/

EnergyRatedHomesof

Alaska/AlaskaStateHomeBuildersAssociation

Washington,

DC/DCHabitatforHumanity

GreenHOME(1

999)

www.greenhome.org

MetropolitanPartnershipforEnergy/GreaterSanAntonio

BuildSanAntonioGreen(2004)

www.buildsagreen.org

BuildersAssoc.(

GSABA)

SanFranciscoBayArea

BuildItGreen

www.build-green.org


35/42

EarthAdvantage(2005)


www.earthadvantage.com

Pittsburg,

PA

Non-profit

GreenBuilding

Alliance(1997)

www.g

bapgh.org

GreenEnergyOhio

GreenEnergyOhio

www.greenenergyohio.org

RemodelingPrograms

HomeBuildersAssociationofM

etroDenver

BuiltGreenCo

lorado(1995)Statewide(2000)

www.builtgreen.org

KitsapCountyHBA(WA)

BuildGreen(2

000)

www.k

itsaphba.com

MasterBuildersAssociationof

KingandSnohomish

TheBuiltGreen

Program(2000)

www.builtgreen.net

Counties(WA)

CityofBoulder(Co)

GreenPointsR

emodelingProgram(2001)

www.environmentalaffairs.com

PortlandGeneralElectric(OR)



AlamedaCounty

HomeRemode

lingGreenBuildingGuidelines(2001)

www.s

topwaste.org

GreaterAtlantaHBA(GA)

EarthCraftHo

use(2003)

www.a

tlantahomebuilders.com

CityofScottsdale

ScottsdalesGREENBUILDINGProgram(2003)

www.c

i.scottsdale.az.us/greenbuilding

CityofSeattle,

WA

GreenHomeR

emodel(2004)

www.seattle.gov/sustainablebuildin

g/greenhome.h

tm

UtilityPrograms

CityofAustin/AustinEnergy

AustinEnergysGreenBuildingProgram(EnergyStar1983)(1991)

www.c

i.austin.tx.us/greenbuilder

TucsonElectricPower

TEPGuarantee

HomeProgram(1997)

www.tucsonelectric.com

ArizonaPublicService

APSPerformanceBuiltHomes(2001)

www.aps.com/homes


36/42

Consultants

MascoContractorServices

EnvironmentsforLiving

(2001)/DiamondClass(2005)

www.e

flbuilder.com

U.S.

GreenFiberLLC

EngineeredForLife

(1998)

www.cocooninsulation.com

TucsonElectricPower

TEPGuarantee

HomeProgram(1997)

www.tucsonelectric.com

ConSol,EnergyConsultants

www.consol.ws

BuildingScienceCorp.

www.buildingscience.com

PortlandGeneralElectric(OR)


OBrien&Co.,

Inc.

MasterBuildersAssociationofKingandSnohomishCounties

(WA)

www.o

brienandco.com

IbacosInc

www.i

bacos.com

StevenWinterAssociates,

Inc.

www.swinter.com

AffordableComfort

http://www.a

ffordablecomfort.org/

QualityBuilt

www.qualitybuilt.com

NorthwestEnergyEfficiencyAlliance/

BetterBricks

www.betterbricks.com

TheGreenBuilder

www.t

hegreenbuilder.com

GreenBuildingServices

AssurancePrograms/Inspection/Certification

QualityBuilt

www.qualitybuilt.com

SkyeTecEnvironmentalBuilding

Solutions

Environmental

DiagnosticServices(EDS)Inc.

www.s

kyetec.com

ThirdEye

www.t

hirdeyeqa.com


37/42

InternationalResource

s/Database

InternationalInitiativeforaSustainableBuiltEnvironment

www.i

iSBE.org

SustainableBuildingInformatio

nSystem(SBIS)-Canada

www.s

bis.info/

RenewableResourceDataCenter(RReDC)/NationalCenterforPhotovoltaics(NCPV)

http://rredc.nrel.gov

CanadaMortgageandHousing

Corporation(CMHC)

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/

CanadaGreenBuildingCouncil

(CaGBC)

www.cagbc.ca

CanadianOfficeOfEnergyEffic

iency/R-2000Certification

www.r

2000.gc.ca

Net-ZeroEnergyHomeCoalition

www.associations.cc/nzeh/index.htm

l

NaturalResourcesCanadasOfficeofEnergyEfficiency

http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca

Committees/Councils/

ResearchGroups

AmericanInstituteofArchitectsCommitteeontheEnvironment(COTE)

www.a

ia.org/cote_

default

LawrenceLabs,

Berkeley,CA-BuildingTechnologies/EnergyAnalysis/IndoorEn

vironment

http://eetd.l

bl.gov/

OakRidgeNationalLaboratory(ORNL)

www.ornl.gov

NationalRenewableEnergyLaboratory

www.nrel.gov

RockyMountainInstitute

www.rmi.org/

NESEA-NortheastSustainableEnergyAssociation

www.nesea.org

EnergyCenterofWisconsin-Da

ylightingCollaborative

www.daylighting.org

LightingDesignLab/BetterBric

ks/NorthwestEnergyEfficiencyAlliance

www.daylightinglab.com

LightingResearchCenter/RensselaerPolytechnicInstitute

www.lrc.rpi.edu/


38/42

NorthCarolinaDaylightingConsortium(NCDLC)

www.ncsc.ncsu.e

du/programs/north_

carolina_

daylighting_

consortium.c

fm

GreenDesignInitiative

http://gdi.ce.cmu.e

du/

ADPSR-Architects/Designers/PlannersforSocialResponsibility

www.a

dpsr.org

RenewableEnergyRes

ource

U.S.

DepartmentofEnergy(DOE)www.energy.gov

EnergyEfficien

cyandRenewableEnergy

www.eere.energy.gov

U.S.

DepartmentofEnergy(DOE)

EnergyEfficien

cyandRenewableEnergy-Links

http://www.eere.energy.gov/

DOE/EPA/NREL/PrivateFoundations

RenewableEnergyPolicyProject(REPP)/CenterforRenewable

www.crest.org

Energy+Susta

inableTechnology(CREST)

EnergyTrustofOregon,

Inc.

RenewablePro

grams

www.energytrust.org/

NationalRenewableEnergyLaboratory

www.nrel.gov

SandiaNationalLaboratories

www.sandia.gov

DSIRE-DatabaseofStateIncentivesforRenewableEnergy

www.dsireusa.org

RenewableEnergyAccess

RenewableEne

rgyAccess.com

www.renewableenergyaccess.com

CaliforniaEnergyCommission

EmergingRene

wablesProgramRebates

www.consumerenergycenter.org/erp

rebate/index.html

RenewableEnergyLinks

http://www.consumerenergycenter.o

rg/renewables/

index.h

tml

Biomass

www.energy.ca.gov/links/biomass.html

CaliforniaBiomassEnergyAllia

nce(CBEA)

www.calbiomass.org

TheGeothermalHeatPumpConsortium

GeoExchange

/GeothermalStateIncentives

www.geoexchange.org/incentives/in

centives.h

tm


39/42

CenterforResourceSolutions

Green-eRenew

ableElectricityCertificationProgram

http://www.green-e.org/

AmericanCouncilforanEnergy

-EfficientEconomy(ACE3)

www.aceee.org

Net-ZeroEnergyHomeCoalition

www.associations.cc/nzeh/index.htm

l

MidwestRenewableEnergyAssociation

www.t

he-mrea.org

FloridaSolarEnergyCenter

www.fsec.ucf.edu

BuildingAmericaTeam

s&Partners

USDepartmentofEnergy(DOE)&EPA

BuildingAmericaProgram(1995)

www.buildingamerica.gov

BIRA-BuildingIndustryResearchAlliance

ConSol,Energy

Consultants

www.consol.ws

BuildingScienceConsortium

BuildingScienceCorporation

www.buildingscience.com

CARB-ConsortiumforAdvanced

ResidentialBuildings

StevenWinter

Associates,

Inc.

www.carb-swa.com

BAIHP-BuildingAmericaIndustr

ializedHousingPartnership

FloridaSolarEnergyCenter

www.fsec.ucf.edu/Bldg/baihp/

IBACOS-IntegratedBuildingand

ConstructionSolutions,

Inc

IBACOS

www.i

bacos.com

E-newsletters

GreenerBuildings.com/NationalInstituteofBuildingSciences(NIBS)

www.greenerbuildings.com

Eco-StructureMag.

www.eco-structure.com

Green@workMag.

www.greenatworkmag.com

GreenClips

www.greenclips.com

BuildingGreen-EnvironmentalB

uildingNews

www.BuildingGreen.com


40/42

SCSCertifiedNews

www.scscertified.com

THENON-TOXICTIMES,

TheSeventhGenerationNewsletter

[email protected]

PATH-APublic-PrivatePartners

hipforAdvancingHousingTechnologies

www.pathnet.org/

InstituteforLocalSelf-Reliance

(ILSR)/TheCarbohydrateEconomy

www.carbohydrateeconomy.org

Solare-Clips/TheRahusInstitu

te

www.californiasolarcenter.org

Solarbuzz,

Inc.

www.solarbuzz.com

GypsumToday

www.gypsumtoday.com/

ACEEE'sGrapevineOnline-Ame

ricanCouncilforanEnergy-EfficientEconomy

www.aceee.org

B.I.P.E.R.-

BuildingIndustryProfessionalsForEnvironmentalResponsibility/iGreenBuild.com

www.i

GreenBuild.com

CRI-CarpetandRugInstitute-Newsline

www.carpet-rug.org

GreenBiz.com/NationalEnviron

mentalEducationandTrainingFoundation

www.greenbiz.com

NorthwestEnergyEfficiencyAlliance-EnergyStarLightingProgram

www.l

ightsite.net

EcoIQ.com

www.EcoIQ.com

TheAshkinGroup,

LLC.-

Destina

tionGreene-newsletter

www.ashkingroup.com

CMC

leaning&MaintenanceM

anagementOnline

www.cmmonline.com

TheGreenGuide

www.t

hegreenguide.com

ResidentialArchitectOnline

www.residentialarchitect.com

HousingZone.com'sGreenBuildingForum

http://housingzone.com/forum-green/

SustainableIndustriesJournal

www.s

ijournal.com


41/42

IrisCommunications,

Inc./

Oikos

www.o

ikos.com

McGraw-HillConstructionArch

itecturalRecordNewsletter-WebInsider

http://archrecord.construction.com/n

ewsletter/0508.asp

HealthyBuildingNetwork

www.healthybuilding.net


42/42

green analysis

Documents